Rev. Monaci vescovi e scuola nella Gall
BOOK REVIEWS
341
were trying to say the same thing, and thus one of the most perplexing historical questions is why so few of them realized this. Schor’s analysis of constantly shifting social networks provides a means of explaining the fact (if it
is a fact) that so many bishops opposed each other so rancorously when they
actually shared a common faith. In providing a very plausible explanation for
this phenomenon, Schor has done historians of all stripes—doctrinal as well
as social—a great service. Not only can we more accurately understand the
way social networks functioned but also, with Schor’s help, we can see that
the battle lines in the controversy often did not line up with the actual lines
of theological agreement and disagreement. Armed with this recognition, we
are in a better position to probe where the theological lines actually lay and
whether or not there was a consensus beneath the shifting sands of doctrinal
expression and clerical networking.
Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
Charlotte, NC
DONALD FAIRBAIRN
Monaci, vescovi e scuola nella Gallia tardoantica. By Roberto Alciati. [Temi
e Testi, Vol. 72.] (Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura. 2009. Pp. xi, 273.
€39,00 paperback. ISBN 978-8-863-72083-9.)
In recent years the late-antique school, rightly considered a key factor to
the survival and evolution of Greco-Roman civilization, has been attracting
scholarly attention. The vivid interest in the Third Sophistic and the excitement raised by the discovery of schoolrooms at Kom el-Dikka in Alexandria
are just two examples. Roberto Alciati’s book certainly is part of this development, although it does not focus on the school as institution, either monastic or secular. Alciati describes the subject of his interest as the relationship
among teachers, pupils, and texts, or the creation of a textual and interpretative community in the monastic milieu of southern and central Gaul, from the
beginning of its literary history early in the fifth century to the publication of
Vitae Patrum Iurensium in c. 520. However, he does not clearly explain the
criteria for his choice of monks, bishops, and writers who composed this
community—and this choice is not self-evident.
The construction of the book seems to reflect the order of research.
Alciati is interested in such topics as the teacher-student relationship, the formation of monastic literary canons, and the character of teaching, but he does
not present them in thematic order. Consecutive chapters are devoted to
major monastic milieus and authors—the circle of St. Martin of Tours and
Sulpicius Severus, Lérins and associated personages (Eucher, bishop of Lyon;
Salvian of Marseille; St. Vincent of Lérins; and St. Faustus, bishop of Riez), the
community of Condatisco in the Jura, Julianus Pomerius, and Claudianus
Mamertus. Such a construction has the obvious advantage of permitting
Alciati to fix and carefully analyze every quotation from these authors in its
context, but at a price—the reader sometimes is at a loss to understand the
342
BOOK REVIEWS
author’s aim. His quite convincing textual interpretations are easy to follow,
but his comprehensive vision of the problem less so.
The conclusions, if not groundbreaking, are definitely interesting. First,
Alciati demonstrates that the most important element that several prominent
Gallic monks and bishops adopted from their school (whatever form it took)
was the method—the classical method of interpreting texts and constructing arguments as well as a method of teaching, manifest especially in quaestiones et responsiones and dialogues. Second, he shows that the teacherstudent relationship, like the links of patronage, created an important
network that connected monks, bishops, and other teachers.Third, he reveals
how consciously the canon of monastic “school” texts was formed and how
a library could have played a founding role for a community. Fourth, Alciati
shows that education in a monastic environment was not based on Christian
literature alone and that philosophical training was appreciated and evidently found useful.
A comparison of the Gallic model with other approaches to Christian education would have been welcome. There is a chapter on the Cappadocian
Fathers, but not on Latin authors from outside Gaul who were involved in
teaching. Therefore, it is up to the reader to decide whether Alciati’s monastic Gaul is just a case study or a phenomenon apart.
University of Warsaw
ROBERT WI ŚNIEWSKI
Heaven’s Purge: Purgatory in Late Antiquity. By Isabel Moreira. (New York:
Oxford University Press. 2010. Pp. x, 310. $65.00. ISBN 978-0-199-73604-1.)
This is an important and thoughtful study of a subject plagued by the success of Jacques Le Goff’s The Birth of Purgatory (Chicago, 1984), which
tried to prove that purgatory did not exist in Western consciousness until the
twelfth century invented the noun. Isabel Moreira gets far beyond this oversimplification, thanks to a faithful reading of many difficult sources. Her book
is a model for work in the humanities, with an interdisciplinary approach to
law, theology, and visionary literature. Her conclusions are clear and succinct.
However, the use of the term late antiquity for the Western world until the
700s results in a chronological misunderstanding and confuses the reader. In
addition, in the first chapters there are frequent references to other scholars
without presentation of their views. A separate chapter summarizing Stand
der Forschung would have been helpful. However, the endnotes are helpful
in substantiating the conclusions of the well-written text.
In a short review it is not possible to convey the rich layers of this monograph, but the reader can look forward to many fresh interpretations of a
varied source material. The author largely rejects Peter Brown’s attractive
view that the concept of purgatory arose from an Irish context. The evidence
is lacking that the classical idea of amnesty was exchanged for an Irish belief
341
were trying to say the same thing, and thus one of the most perplexing historical questions is why so few of them realized this. Schor’s analysis of constantly shifting social networks provides a means of explaining the fact (if it
is a fact) that so many bishops opposed each other so rancorously when they
actually shared a common faith. In providing a very plausible explanation for
this phenomenon, Schor has done historians of all stripes—doctrinal as well
as social—a great service. Not only can we more accurately understand the
way social networks functioned but also, with Schor’s help, we can see that
the battle lines in the controversy often did not line up with the actual lines
of theological agreement and disagreement. Armed with this recognition, we
are in a better position to probe where the theological lines actually lay and
whether or not there was a consensus beneath the shifting sands of doctrinal
expression and clerical networking.
Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
Charlotte, NC
DONALD FAIRBAIRN
Monaci, vescovi e scuola nella Gallia tardoantica. By Roberto Alciati. [Temi
e Testi, Vol. 72.] (Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura. 2009. Pp. xi, 273.
€39,00 paperback. ISBN 978-8-863-72083-9.)
In recent years the late-antique school, rightly considered a key factor to
the survival and evolution of Greco-Roman civilization, has been attracting
scholarly attention. The vivid interest in the Third Sophistic and the excitement raised by the discovery of schoolrooms at Kom el-Dikka in Alexandria
are just two examples. Roberto Alciati’s book certainly is part of this development, although it does not focus on the school as institution, either monastic or secular. Alciati describes the subject of his interest as the relationship
among teachers, pupils, and texts, or the creation of a textual and interpretative community in the monastic milieu of southern and central Gaul, from the
beginning of its literary history early in the fifth century to the publication of
Vitae Patrum Iurensium in c. 520. However, he does not clearly explain the
criteria for his choice of monks, bishops, and writers who composed this
community—and this choice is not self-evident.
The construction of the book seems to reflect the order of research.
Alciati is interested in such topics as the teacher-student relationship, the formation of monastic literary canons, and the character of teaching, but he does
not present them in thematic order. Consecutive chapters are devoted to
major monastic milieus and authors—the circle of St. Martin of Tours and
Sulpicius Severus, Lérins and associated personages (Eucher, bishop of Lyon;
Salvian of Marseille; St. Vincent of Lérins; and St. Faustus, bishop of Riez), the
community of Condatisco in the Jura, Julianus Pomerius, and Claudianus
Mamertus. Such a construction has the obvious advantage of permitting
Alciati to fix and carefully analyze every quotation from these authors in its
context, but at a price—the reader sometimes is at a loss to understand the
342
BOOK REVIEWS
author’s aim. His quite convincing textual interpretations are easy to follow,
but his comprehensive vision of the problem less so.
The conclusions, if not groundbreaking, are definitely interesting. First,
Alciati demonstrates that the most important element that several prominent
Gallic monks and bishops adopted from their school (whatever form it took)
was the method—the classical method of interpreting texts and constructing arguments as well as a method of teaching, manifest especially in quaestiones et responsiones and dialogues. Second, he shows that the teacherstudent relationship, like the links of patronage, created an important
network that connected monks, bishops, and other teachers.Third, he reveals
how consciously the canon of monastic “school” texts was formed and how
a library could have played a founding role for a community. Fourth, Alciati
shows that education in a monastic environment was not based on Christian
literature alone and that philosophical training was appreciated and evidently found useful.
A comparison of the Gallic model with other approaches to Christian education would have been welcome. There is a chapter on the Cappadocian
Fathers, but not on Latin authors from outside Gaul who were involved in
teaching. Therefore, it is up to the reader to decide whether Alciati’s monastic Gaul is just a case study or a phenomenon apart.
University of Warsaw
ROBERT WI ŚNIEWSKI
Heaven’s Purge: Purgatory in Late Antiquity. By Isabel Moreira. (New York:
Oxford University Press. 2010. Pp. x, 310. $65.00. ISBN 978-0-199-73604-1.)
This is an important and thoughtful study of a subject plagued by the success of Jacques Le Goff’s The Birth of Purgatory (Chicago, 1984), which
tried to prove that purgatory did not exist in Western consciousness until the
twelfth century invented the noun. Isabel Moreira gets far beyond this oversimplification, thanks to a faithful reading of many difficult sources. Her book
is a model for work in the humanities, with an interdisciplinary approach to
law, theology, and visionary literature. Her conclusions are clear and succinct.
However, the use of the term late antiquity for the Western world until the
700s results in a chronological misunderstanding and confuses the reader. In
addition, in the first chapters there are frequent references to other scholars
without presentation of their views. A separate chapter summarizing Stand
der Forschung would have been helpful. However, the endnotes are helpful
in substantiating the conclusions of the well-written text.
In a short review it is not possible to convey the rich layers of this monograph, but the reader can look forward to many fresh interpretations of a
varied source material. The author largely rejects Peter Brown’s attractive
view that the concept of purgatory arose from an Irish context. The evidence
is lacking that the classical idea of amnesty was exchanged for an Irish belief